Message from the terrorists

[HunterSeeker]

That is incorrect. It is foreign terrorists or Iraqi muslims who have been brainwashed by corrupt clierics. You don't have Joe Iraqi blowing up a Baghdad fruit market becuase he disagrees with the reasons for the US invasion. I mean come on. Sure, you might have some who think they are "defending Iraq", but if that was really true why do they mainly target Iraqi's, and why haven't they stopped now that Iraq has a democratically elected govt?

Could it be that it was just a convienent cover for their extremism? Hmmmmmmm....

But its Joe Iraqi that takes a fuel truck and rams it into a US tank.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Minimum Iraqi civilian death toll I believe is at 14'000. During the first Gulf War it was somewhere around 20'000. It's a well known fact that our actions have killed more innocents than the 'terrorists' actions. I just don't like it how we can say that we are allowed to do it because we're fighting an enemy, but when the insurgants fight their enemy and innocents are killed its always on purpose, because, it's not

Not to say that sometimes they don't do it on purpose, but certainly not all the time.".

your making the 2 sides look the same, like its allies V axis of WWII. when its not, the more they kill innocents, the more unstablised the country looks.. resulting in more people hating the coalition. i'd say that the civilian deaths caused by the coalition were not on purpose, mostly mistakes, just as what you call "insurgents" do.
actually i didnt say "coalition are allowed to kill innocents", because that would be stupid.

I believe is at 14'000.

Was somewhere around 20'000.

those sound like estimations. some sources who hate america might have boosted those numbers up to get more anger pointed towards the coalition. personally i think this is a war of winning people minds and hearts, and also a war between the left and right medias around the world. sadly there are more "anti-coalition" media sources today, that most criticism is pointed towards our troops and not the civilian killing terrorists themselves.

You're missing the point. People who do this have no heavy weapons, and this is the only way to strike a hard blow at the invaders - they're doing it because they're being invaded, and are fighting these invaders. They don't trust the coalition, and with good reason.

i remember reading that they had a lot of weapon suppliers coming from Russia, china and some other anti-american countries myself. so i dont think they are short-handed of weapons, do you?

but they were invaded for a reason, not because america wanted to become the capturer. in fact america wanted to be the saviour of iraqi people from saddam and co. and now its esculated into terrorists making a country a battlezone. if the terrorists wanted iraq to be free, they should leave it up too the coalition, because thats what all the innicent civilians want. the innocent are only fearing terrorists blowing up things and killing them. if you asked an iraqi who are you most scared of, i guarantee he wud say "the terrorists". not the coalition.

But you've been calling everyone we're fighting over there terrorists, they're not. That's my problem. No doubt that the fanatics over there are 'brainwashed' to at least some degree, but the fact is we're not dealing with fanatics all the time, or even most of the time - it's people who've watched us invade with very little legitimate cause, and are responding to that.

no its people who want to get paid money to attack the coalition, and most of these terrorists in iraq aint even from iraq anyway, they are from all over the world (mostly middle east).
so when you say "invade they're country, your incorrect. its jus people working for the terrorist masterminds, some are brainwashed, and some are just doing it for the money. they have no respect for iraq or the iraqi people at all.

Yes, it would be mayhem - but not in the way you seem to be implying. You think that they will continue to drive car bombs at civilians? For what reason? They're achieving nothing.
They are doing this in response to the coalition's invasion Attacking their own people will not get them anywhere.

well i didnt see saddam stop killing innocents because there was no invaders in his country before the second gulf war, so why would these terrorists stop, if the coalition retreat and they gain total power of an unstablised country. why didnt saddam stop killing his own people then, if it didnt get him anywhere...

Iraq has a large organised terror network? News to me.
They have many groups of differing opinions operating generally independently against the coalition's invasion.
Saddam was evil, no doubt, but Iraq has good reason to fight against the coalition - western policies have resulted in far more deaths than Saddam ever caused. Lesser of two evils? Saddam is, in many people's eyes over there.

nah all these small groups are under the orders of Zarqawi the major terrorist leader in iraq, with a 25 million bounty on his head, the same amount as bin laden.
can you prove that we have killed more than saddma did, because how can you know how much saddam killed. how can anyone know how much saddam killed, and how can you know how much the coalition killed in that fact.

saddam didnt have any terrorists roaming the street against him, thats the only reason why. thats the only bad thing about all of this, because america wanted to free iraq. it has not only brought the good guys (coalition/freedom fighter), but it had brought a lot of enemy anti-americans aswell (al-qaeda/worldwide terrorists). now all these terrorists are placing the country under kidnap... the coalition has not got an option to leave.. ;( . it has to stay and protect the iraqi people.

Yeah, I'm agnostic, amusingly because it fits in with human logic. We don't know anything about a God, but we can't prove there isn't one. If you want my honest opinion I'm very very certain there is no God, no higher being - but I just don't dismiss the idea.

well, imo we cant prove there is one either. the proof that there isnt a god, is far more realistic than the proof showing that god actually exists. if you get me.

hmm i dont know. there may be a higher spirit. but hey.. we will NEVER know until were dead. but i HIGHLY doubt that there is a god in human form. if so "why is he a human and not a monkey :monkee: lol..

Again, many people over there see the coaltion as worse than Saddam - so far, statistically, they're achieving that. If people didn't think that they wouldn't be risking their lives fighting against them.

they will if they think its too please Allah, or for personal income.

And you CANNOT FORCE DEMOCRACY ON A COUNTRY. Clearly too many people are a) Anti-west (so we should not be the ones to make them a democracy) b) Caught up in the countries old ideals (Just as if a socialist nation invaded and overthrew our government saying there's is better, the enemy would be those crazy people with those old archaic capitilist ideals in their head)

it will take some time, but the iraqis have to deal with the fact that democracy is the way forward, for a more free state.
most people there would rather see the terrorists leave than the coalition.

I don't like either side of this war, but in the same breath, I don't hate any of them. I hate some actions from both sides.
What I'm trying to do here is address the problem people have in labelling the enemy as terrorists, which many clearly aren't. They're using unconventional methods to attack an enemy that they rightly percieve as such - which, by the way, does not make them terrorists.

i hate the terrorists, because they capture people, kill them blow people up, blow KIDS up. and all on purpose.. thats the main thing. when the coalition do it by mistake (even tho that isnt good enough imo). they are killin INNOCENT PEOPLE to achieve thier political goal, to get the people of the world to group against the us and its allies. i think theyve done a very good job. they have made the world hate america and co.

like i said they both do very wrong things. but the terrorist organizations do it much more to achieve they're goal.

but those unconvential methods to attack they're enemy are from killin innocent people - bottom line, no more discussion on that matter, they are terrorists. they also use the media to attack the coalition. which gets people from around the world to change thier minds. the only media supporting the coalition i can think of is "FOX news", all the others are ANTI-coalition.

enough of this talk.
u watch the rugby on the weekend m8?

 

[GhostFox]

And I swear I must be reading different news to everyone else. Every story bar perhaps 5 I've read about suicide bombers in the last few months have been targetting military sites, or the coalition controlled Iraqi police force.

Suicide attacks on millitary instillations are very rare, and the Iraqi police are a civillian institution and thus makes it a terrorist action to attack them.

but just because people are extremists doesn't mean they don't have cause to attack. Or do you think they do it just to get a kick out of it?

They've been brainwashed by corrupt people who use their religion in order to twist them into becoming mindless slaves to their fanatical cause. I'm sure most of them die with smiles on their faces. They really died the day their brainwashing was sucessful. Their body is now just a vessel for servitude.

 

[GhostFox]

A political gain in this case is not really dominant. She wasn´t a terrorist.

OK, I don't know enough about her to say if she had political motivations, though it seemed like it from your story.

To be fair however we will say:

Worst Case: Terrorist.

Best Case: Mass Murderer.


Does that make you feel better?

 

[GhostFox]

But its Joe Iraqi that takes a fuel truck and rams it into a US tank.

Joe Iraqi is sitting at home watching "Extreme Makeover: Baghdad Home Edition" (I know that is not the actual name of it, but it is the same thing and it is the #1 TV show in Iraq. If anyone knows the real name, please post it) and drinking Pepsi.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Joe Iraqi is sitting at home watching "Extreme Makeover: Baghdad Home Edition" (I know that is not the actual name of it, but it is the same thing and it is the #1 TV show in Iraq. If anyone knows the real name, please post it) and drinking Pepsi.

i agree.

these people just want to be normal!

not under the rule of whacky saddam, and not being controlled by terrorists. these people just want a normal life, and now because of these terrorists, the coalition have to stay there and keep protecting the average joe iraqi.

 

[burner69]

your making the 2 sides look the same, like its allies V axis of WWII. when its not, the more they kill innocents, the more unstablised the country looks.. resulting in more people hating the coalition. i'd say that the civilian deaths caused by the coalition were not on purpose, mostly mistakes, just as what you call "insurgents" do.
actually i didnt say "coalition are allowed to kill innocents", because that would be stupid.

Oh yes, I don't deny the coalition have good intent, I'd never suggest they kill innocents on purpose. Although I have seen some evidence that they can be far from strict about reducing the numbers - but admittidely such evidence is few and far between, and appears to be caused by individuals rather than policy.

those sound like estimations. some sources who hate america might have boosted those numbers up to get more anger pointed towards the coalition. personally i think this is a war of winning people minds and hearts, and also a war between the left and right medias around the world. sadly there are more "anti-coalition" media sources today, that most criticism is pointed towards our troops and not the civilian killing terrorists themselves.

The 14'000 is the minimum, it ranges from 14'000 to 100'000 last time I checked.
Winning hearts and minds could just be a nice way of putting 'brainwashing'. I'm sorry, I just don't trust this whole Iraq situation, I've read about countries being invaded and dictators just being replaced by dictators, with support from the invading army - Im skeptical, as are the terrorists/ insurgants/ wateva.

i remember reading that they had a lot of weapon suppliers coming from Russia, china and some other anti-american countries myself. so i dont think they are short-handed of weapons, do you?

They don't appear to have any heavy weapons, or we would have seen them used.

but they were invaded for a reason, not because america wanted to become the capturer. in fact america wanted to be the saviour of iraqi people from saddam and co. and now its esculated into terrorists making a country a battlezone.

That can easily be put down as Western propaganda. At first it was WMDs, now its freeing Iraq. I'm a skeptical c**t, sorry.

if the terrorists wanted iraq to be free, they should leave it up too the coalition, because thats what all the innicent civilians want. the innocent are only fearing terrorists blowing up things and killing them. if you asked an iraqi who are you most scared of, i guarantee he wud say "the terrorists". not the coalition.

Some would, some would not. You ask the people who's family members were killed by UN sanctions, or ask someone who's parents were blown up by coalition bombing who they prefer.

no its people who want to get paid money to attack the coalition, and most of these terrorists in iraq aint even from iraq anyway, they are from all over the world (mostly middle east).
so when you say "invade they're country, your incorrect. its jus people working for the terrorist masterminds, some are brainwashed, and some are just doing it for the money. they have no respect for iraq or the iraqi people at all.

Middle eastern people who see the invasion as the start of the takeover of the middle east. They're fighting to protect their land. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant, they believe it is.

well i didnt see saddam stop killing innocents because there was no invaders in his country before the second gulf war, so why would these terrorists stop, if the coalition retreat and they gain total power of an unstablised country. why didnt saddam stop killing his own people then, if it didnt get him anywhere...

Terrorists are not Saddam. Apples and oranges chief.

nah all these small groups are under the orders of Zarqawi the major terrorist leader in iraq, with a 25 million bounty on his head, the same amount as bin laden.
can you prove that we have killed more than saddma did, because how can you know how much saddam killed. how can anyone know how much saddam killed, and how can you know how much the coalition killed in that fact.

We have estimates, and the ones I've seen point that the west have done far more damage to Iraq than Saddam.
And Zarqawi, do you have a source to prove that? As far as I know he's the leader of the most extreme group over there, little more.

saddam didnt have any terrorists roaming the street against him, thats the only reason why. thats the only bad thing about all of this, because america wanted to free iraq. it has not only brought the good guys (coalition/freedom fighter), but it had brought a lot of enemy anti-americans aswell (al-qaeda/worldwide terrorists). now all these terrorists are placing the country under kidnap... the coalition has not got an option to leave.. ;( . it has to stay and protect the iraqi people.

True, we do have to stay - you won't see my arguing that. We're stuck in a pickle though. (Pickle kinda underminds the situation eh?)
And there's no evidence Al Quaeda is a worldwide terror network by the way.

well, imo we cant prove there is one either. the proof that there isnt a god, is far more realistic than the proof showing that god actually exists. if you get me.

I getcha. Far more realistic, but nothing can be certain, if you get me.

hmm i dont know. there may be a higher spirit. but hey.. we will NEVER know until were dead. but i HIGHLY doubt that there is a god in human form. if so "why is he a human and not a monkey :monkee: lol..

He made us in his image, dur,

they will if they think its too please Allah, or for personal income.

Or belief.

it will take some time, but the iraqis have to deal with the fact that democracy is the way forward, for a more free state.

Forcing opinion causes problems. Seriously, consider the socialist example I gave.

most people there would rather see the terrorists leave than the coalition.

Probably true. Dosen't mean they're wrong.

i hate the terrorists, because they capture people, kill them blow people up, blow KIDS up. and all on purpose.. thats the main thing. when the coalition do it by mistake (even tho that isnt good enough imo). they are killin INNOCENT PEOPLE to achieve thier political goal, to get the people of the world to group against the us and its allies. i think theyve done a very good job. they have made the world hate america and co.

So do I.
America did a good job making the world hate them too. Terrorists admittedly brought a lot of it tonight.

like i said they both do very wrong things. but the terrorist organizations do it much more to achieve they're goal.

Not true.

but those unconvential methods to attack they're enemy are from killin innocent people - bottom line, no more discussion on that matter, they are terrorists. they also use the media to attack the coalition. which gets people from around the world to change thier minds. the only media supporting the coalition i can think of is "FOX news", all the others are ANTI-coalition.

Woah woah, the media is very anti terrorist. Bush's "We must crush these jealous people who are doing this because they're stupid and jealous is propaganda.

enough of this talk.
u watch the rugby on the weekend m8?

Takes it out of you dosen't it? *Wipes brow*
You mean the England v Wales? Urgh, don't remind me...
:cheers:

 

[KoreBolteR]

They don't appear to have any heavy weapons, or we would have seen them used.

ohh, you meant nukes .. well im sure they want them. im pretty sure they are in Iran and North korea buyung some as we speak.

That can easily be put down as Western propaganda. At first it was WMDs, now its freeing Iraq. I'm a skeptical c**t, sorry.

nobody can ever know if there was or wasnt any WMD in that country. i believe it was smuggled to another country eg syria etc.....

Some would, some would not. You ask the people who's family members were killed by UN sanctions, or ask someone who's parents were blown up by coalition bombing who they prefer..

thats like me saying "go ask the familys of the victims killed/blown up/kidnapped, by the terrorists.
:cheese:

Middle eastern people who see the invasion as the start of the takeover of the middle east. They're fighting to protect their land. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant, they believe it is.

yeah, because they have been brainwashed. ;(

We have estimates, and the ones I've seen point that the west have done far more damage to Iraq than Saddam.
And Zarqawi, do you have a source to prove that? As far as I know he's the leader of the most extreme group over there, little more.

well if you remember.. margaret hassan, the anglo-irish peacekeeper, who was fluent with her arabic and lived in iraq for over 30 years was captured by a froup, and they seeked zarqawis opinion. therefore, all lookin up to him. im guessing they are all linked, all get payed by one another.. like a terrorist chain.

True, we do have to stay - you won't see my arguing that. We're stuck in a pickle though. (Pickle kinda underminds the situation eh?)
And there's no evidence Al Quaeda is a worldwide terror network by the way.

yeah actually i remember seeing a BBC documentary on this. very intresting to watch. but they certainly have a lot of groups around the world in some countries planning attacks.

remember the attacks in bali, the terrorist groups in britain who got foiled by mI-5 and police. all had links to al-qaeda .

yes we are in a pickle.

He made us in his image, dur,

Evolution, or was you joking? i hope you was, LOL.

Or belief.

nah, to please Allah and for personal income :upstare:

Woah woah, the media is very anti terrorist. Bush's "We must crush these jealous people who are doing this because they're stupid and jealous is propaganda..

nah every media source always has a go at our troops. always defending the terrorists. not including FOX ...

Takes it out of you dosen't it? *Wipes brow*

aye it does, my back is killing now

You mean the England v Wales? Urgh, don't remind me...
:cheers:

no the ones these weekend

scotland V ireland
england V france
wales V italy

are you into rugby.
ne way might go and watch tv, study for my course then bed .. :cheers:

might cya later m8

 

[Raziaar]

LOL, have you never learnt about religious tolerance?

By saying Allah doesn't exist you are basically writing off the whole religion of Islam.

In Islam, Allah = God.

And how do you know Allah doesn't exist? Are you privillaged to some information the rest of us aren't? Do you have a special communication channel with the almighty?

If not, it's safe to say that it's a matter of opinion, not fact.

As for killing innocents, I agree with you, it should not be tolerated, but I believe there are better ways of solving the problem rather than just with weapons.

Wait a second. Aren't you one of those guys who bashes Christianity, but defends Islam now? Now that's just crazy. Or am I wrong about seeing you in the other threads saying the christian god does not exist, no matter what?

I'm not one to bash either. If people want to worship a god, let them do so, and I have respect for them, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights and lives of other people who live. Killing in the name of god isn't right.

 

[burner69]

Suicide attacks on millitary instillations are very rare, and the Iraqi police are a civillian institution and thus makes it a terrorist action to attack them.

But still, western organised, and they are intent on attacking the west - or people who side with them. Just as we would fight against any coalition personnel who began fighting for the insurgants.
Just out of interest, if we're saying that attacking civilians to induce fear, and make them hate the coalition is true - surely we're worse for that. The UN (let's try and avoid this debate here :cheers: ) sanctions against Iraq were designed to make the civilian population overthrow Saddam. That didn't happen and now half a million people are dead.
Lesser of two evils?
(NB: Like I said earlier, I'm neutral to both sides, everyone has their own reason for fighting a war. I often seem more anti-west because I feel that, well, being a westerner I get my fair share of pro-west, anti-insurgant info from the media, and I'm probably trying to balance the whole situation into a more realistic one).

They've been brainwashed by corrupt people who use their religion in order to twist them into becoming mindless slaves to their fanatical cause. I'm sure most of them die with smiles on their faces. They really died the day their brainwashing was sucessful. Their body is now just a vessel for servitude.

I could apply that kind of speak to the coalition. They're being lied to about an enemy, sent to war for money, with Bush's good vs evil speeches brainwashing them. I think the idea that they actually believe in it, without being 'brainwashed' is more plausible for both sides. After all, after seeing, or hearing about the west doing so much damage to their country is it any wonder they hate us? Do they NEED to be brainwashed further?

 

[GhostFox]

If people want to worship a god, let them do so, and I have respect for them, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights and lives of other people who live. Killing in the name of god isn't right.

If only there were more of us who believed that....

 

[KoreBolteR]

(NB: Like I said earlier, I'm neutral to both sides, everyone has their own reason for fighting a war. I often seem more anti-west because I feel that, well, being a westerner I get my fair share of pro-west, anti-insurgant info from the media, and I'm probably trying to balance the whole situation into a more realistic one).

well, im a westerner, and i see more anti-west than anti-terrorist media outlets.

I'm not one to bash either. If people want to worship a god, let them do so, and I have respect for them, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights and lives of other people who live. Killing in the name of god isn't right..

took the words right out of my mouth

 

[GhostFox]

After all, after seeing, or hearing about the west doing so much damage to their country is it any wonder they hate us? Do they NEED to be brainwashed further?

How do you know that the Iraqi people hate the US? The last Iraqi opinion poll I read (granted this was quite a few months ago) stated that over 90% of Iraqi people thought that the insurgents were wrong in attacking the coalition forces, and that they supported the coalition goals, at least in principle.

When is the last time any Western nation had 90% support for something?

 

[burner69]

ohh, you meant nukes .. well im sure they want them. im pretty sure they are in Iran and North korea buyung some as we speak.

No, I meant artillery, tanks, APCs. I haven't seen much evidence of any of those at all.

nobody can ever know if there was or wasnt any WMD in that country. i believe it was smuggled to another country eg syria etc.....

WMD debate can go on forever. If you believe that, fair play. I don't, and I think the weapons inspectors have done a good job in convincing me.

thats like me saying "go ask the familys of the victims killed/blown up/kidnapped, by the terrorists.
:cheese:

You certainly could. Although there would be more people directly affected by the west's policies.

yeah, because they have been brainwashed. ;(

Source? Some people might have, most, I believe, have a legitimate, logical reason to hate the west and fight against them when they invade on false premises.

well if you remember.. margaret hassan, the anglo-irish peacekeeper, who was fluent with her arabic and lived in iraq for over 30 years was captured by a froup, and they seeked zarqawis opinion. therefore, all lookin up to him. im guessing they are all linked, all get payed by one another.. like a terrorist chain.

What happened there was they sold her on to him. They saw a chance to make some money and used it. It's like saying that because we trade with Russia, or supply weapons to Palistine that they're our leaders.

yeah actually i remember seeing a BBC documentary on this. very intresting to watch. but they certainly have a lot of groups around the world in some countries planning attacks.

Perhaps a few more than before the Iraq war, but the whole things been blown out of proportion.

remember the attacks in bali, the terrorist groups in britain who got foiled by mI-5 and police. all had links to al-qaeda .

Don't mean to be a t**t but have you got a source for that? The amount of "Al Quaeda" people who've been captured who turn out to have no ties whatsoever has made me very critical.

yes we are in a pickle.

Doh.

Evolution, or was you joking? i hope you was, LOL.

I joke.

nah, to please Allah and for personal income :upstare:

Please Allah = Belief?
Also saying that EVERYONE does it because of their religion is a very sweeping statement. So many people have so many reasons to hate the west, when they come and invade they're just asking to get attacked.
Also, with the odds being stacked so greatly against them in standard fire fights, and with the more succesful suicide bombs ensuring their death, I doubt money has much to do with it.

nah every media source always has a go at our troops. always defending the terrorists. not including FOX ...

They critisize certain elements. We needed to see the torture situation, just because you're dealing with a foreign enemy different to you, does not mean you can drop all your morals and torture them. Look at Guantanimo bay, people got beaten in there, and then get released with no charge.... that says to me; torturing innocent people.

aye it does, my back is killing now

Mein augen tout vai! :rolling:

no the ones these weekend

scotland V ireland
england V france
wales V italy

are you into rugby.
ne way might go and watch tv, study for my course then bed .. :cheers:

might cya later m8

Missed them, had a mate over and did some shrooms - was some quality stuff. I worked out the meaning of life... forgot it now though obviously.

I don't follow any sport really, but if Englands playing and I'm not up to anything I'll get some folk togther and head down the pub... not much else to do in Wales is there? Legal and illegal drugs, with sport.... oh... and debating of course.

Take it easy

 

[burner69]

How do you know that the Iraqi people hate the US? The last Iraqi opinion poll I read (granted this was quite a few months ago) stated that over 90% of Iraqi people thought that the insurgents were wrong in attacking the coalition forces, and that they supported the coalition goals, at least in principle.

When is the last time any Western nation had 90% support for something?

Would be interested in seeing that.
One point... if people really hate them I can see them getting up and fighting against them. Of course then they're terrorists, and I doubt they got interviewed. But still, 90% is a lot. Fair play.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

First, this was very old -- it was released on the eve of the Fallujah battle.

Second, and lets get this straight; why are posting this? Whats your threads goal here?

 

[Nofuture]

OK, I don't know enough about her to say if she had political motivations, though it seemed like it from your story.

There was some political motivation, but only a sligth one. It seems more her to be very desperate, frightened and therefore didn´t thinking rational.

Unfortunately ones who push people into such situations usualy stay unpunished.

To be fair however we will say:

Worst Case: Terrorist.

Best Case: Mass Murderer.


Does that make you feel better?

Sorry, I don´t get your point here.

 

[burner69]

First, this was very old -- it was released on the eve of the Fallujah battle.

Second, and lets get this straight; why are posting this? Whats your threads goal here?

Well, I haven't heard anyone else mention that they'd read it before.

To contrast the difference between th propaganda the west throw out, and that of the insurgants to try and get a little past the idea that everyone who is fighting against the coalition are evil/ jealous/ hate freedom etc.

What was the point in your post?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

You certainly could. Although there would be more people directly affected by the west's policies.

Although, such numbers would be illigitmate (SP) if the World Trade Centers and Pentagon where not attacked. As is, Israel is doing the right thing -- thats also Western policy.

Care to explain that?

Source? Some people might have, most, I believe, have a legitimate, logical reason to hate the west and fight against them when they invade on false premises.

Not true. [Watch to devour your own hypocracy]

http://www.pmw.org.il/tv part3.html

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_tabisho.asx

"Talking Chick Promotes Massacre with AK-47 to child moderators"

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_AllahAckbar_7.asx

This MTV style music video from PA TV calls upon children to attack Israelis with stones: “You will not be saved, Oh Zionist, from the volcano of my county’s stones” and is sung to scenes of children throwing stones and participating in frenzied "war dances”.

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_girl_7.asx

Watch here to see how Burners "logical reason" flies right out the door.

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_noFear_7.asx

More to watch!

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_MotherNotHumiliate_7.asx

Music video teaches Palestinian Children on how to destroy Jewish Symbols and how to slaughter to Israeli children.

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_toys_7.asx

Young Palestinian Boys and Girls taught to replace trucks and dolls with bombs -- extended video shows how to hide explosives in toys and backpacks

http://pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_kidKalach_7.asx

In the very same week that the Palestinian Journalists Union "banned journalists from photographing Palestinian Children carrying weapons ... [because] the pictures harm the Palestinian cause" [AP, Jerusalem Post Aug. 26, 2002] PATV interviewed a child in his home - and for the purpose of the interview - he held a kalatchnikov Authomatic Rifle. The media regularly shows pictures of children with weapons. [PATV, Aug. 23, 2002]

How is sending your children to war, logical?

[Oh, before you argue -- lets remember the Hitler youth. Surely, you dont believe Germany had a right to force or allow kids into war?]

What happened there was they sold her on to him. They saw a chance to make some money and used it.

So them making money off of her death and maiming video [Its updated! On Ogrish everyone!] is a-okay?

You, have some very skewered morals my friend.

Perhaps a few more than before the Iraq war, but the whole things been blown out of proportion.

Damn my restrictions on Middle-Eastern Islamo-Fasso Propaganda videos!

[I have some videos that were published in Paris, for those of you who are interested] (Warning! I will only send links in through E-mails. No PMs. Sorry, but I cant link on the forums)

The amount of "Al Quaeda" people who've been captured who turn out to have no ties whatsoever has made me very critical.

Oh noes! Dissent! OMFG STOP MY RIGHTS ARE BEING TRAMPELED! [endliberal]

So many people have so many reasons to hate the west, when they come and invade they're just asking to get attacked.

Well, the only two good ones I heard were: All of Western Society is waging a war against Islam, and, they support Israel.

What other reasons where they're?

We needed to see the torture situation, just because you're dealing with a foreign enemy different to you, does not mean you can drop all your morals and torture them.

Tell that too ...

The Ansar Al-Sunnah Army (40% of Iraqi Combatants associate with this group)
12 beheading videos, 16 Hostage execution vidoes, 103 Suicide and Car bombing videos
The Iraqi Freedom Brigades (30% of Iraqi Combatants associate with this group) 6 hostage beheading videos, 27 known hostage execution videos, 102 Suicide and Car bombing videos

well, im a westerner, and i see more anti-west than anti-terrorist media outlets.

Remember! Despite rash beheading and execution videos -- despite Suicide Bombing videos involving Children with Down Syndrome (Ogrish has the video if your interested) -- despite running down as recent, one black guard member and posting his beheading video (Ogrish) -- despite declaring Jihad 17 times throughout major middle-eastern countries against the Western Society -- despite the 9/11 attacks -- despite 60 full years of trying to wipe Israel off the global map ...

THEY JUST HATE OUR FOREIGN POLICY.

Dope.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

What was the point in your post?

Waaahhh! Answer my question!

 

[burner69]

Although, such numbers would be illigitmate (SP) if the World Trade Centers and Pentagon where not attacked. As is, Israel is doing the right thing -- thats also Western policy.

Israels a tough one. If you want to debate it, another thread perhaps?

No, actually the WTC was attacked, in part, because of the killing of Iraqi innocents by the UN sanctions against them. Which resulted in half a million deaths from water bourne diseases.

I watched some of those videos. And I might be missing something here, but the Israel and Palestine conflict, although I admit I don't know much about it, is a religious conflict. I don't see how this relates to the idea of terrorists in Iraq.

So them making money off of her death and maiming video [Its updated! On Ogrish everyone!] is a-okay?

A bit out of context there buddy. We were discussing the idea of there being a large scale network of organised terrorists in Iraq. I was explaining that selling a hostage to another group does not show that they are a network.

You, have some very skewered morals my friend.

If you want to accuse me of supporting the murder of innocent people you have very skewered morals.

Damn my restrictions on Middle-Eastern Islamo-Fasso Propaganda videos!
[I have some videos that were published in Paris, for those of you who are interested] (Warning! I will only send links in through E-mails. No PMs. Sorry, but I cant link on the forums)

I can imagine them being quite extreme.

Oh noes! Dissent! OMFG STOP MY RIGHTS ARE BEING TRAMPELED! [endliberal]

What are you talking about?

Well, the only two good ones I heard were: All of Western Society is waging a war against Islam, and, they support Israel.

What other reasons where they're?

Supporting Israel is regarded as one.
UN sanctions against Iraq, resulting in many hundreds of thousands being killed is another.
I think placing dictators and regimes in power is another one.
The Gulf war, the whole, taking two sides annoyed them too.

It's hard to get straight answers about this from anywhere.

Ask Bush, or quite a few people on these forums, they'll tell you it's "jealousy".

Tell that too ...

The Ansar Al-Sunnah Army (40% of Iraqi Combatants associate with this group)
12 beheading videos, 16 Hostage execution vidoes, 103 Suicide and Car bombing videos
The Iraqi Freedom Brigades (30% of Iraqi Combatants associate with this group) 6 hostage beheading videos, 27 known hostage execution videos, 102 Suicide and Car bombing videos

Ah tres interesant. You got much info on these groups?
On topic: Firstly, this has little to do with the torture videos. Many people who were tortured were believed to be innocents, and besides, because the enemy is barbaric we have to be too? Shall we air some decaptitations of Guantanimo bay prisoners? We're supposed to be spreading freedom, not getting away with murder because the enemy use horrific tactics.

Remember! Despite rash beheading and execution videos -- despite Suicide Bombing videos involving Children with Down Syndrome (Ogrish has the video if your interested) -- despite running down as recent, one black guard member and posting his beheading video (Ogrish) -- despite declaring Jihad 17 times throughout major middle-eastern countries against the Western Society -- despite the 9/11 attacks -- despite 60 full years of trying to wipe Israel off the global map ...

THEY JUST HATE OUR FOREIGN POLICY.

Dope.

They are using the beheading vids to get us out of the country. We invaded, they are trying to scare us off. They don't want us there because we've f**ked them over several times. The 9/11 attacks were a response to foreign policy, I'd love to get my hands on the statement OBL gave about it, read a bit earlier - big clue: it wasn't "I'm green with envy".

Yes, they do not like the west's attitude and actions towards them. It results in deaths, many deaths, and they want revenge.

How much more complex do you need it to be?

Resin

 

[K e r b e r o s]

No, actually the WTC was attacked, in part, because of the killing of Iraqi innocents by the UN sanctions against them. Which resulted in half a million deaths from water bourne diseases.

Oh, so Iraq was involved with the WTC incident then? I thought we all agreed the invasion of Iraq was unjustified ... perhaps I was wrong.

I don't see how this relates to the idea of terrorists in Iraq.

Well, did you read what I quoted off of you, and my later responses? I think that if you had, you would've understood I was pointing out the recruitment measures of terrorist organizations going so far as to encourage children into war.

I mean, it was'nt that hard to get to.

A bit out of context there buddy. We were discussing the idea of there being a large scale network of organised terrorists in Iraq. I was explaining that selling a hostage to another group does not show that they are a network.

First, I'm not your buddy.

Second, you were defending the morality of the terror groups who sold Hassan to the Al-Zarqwai linked groups. From which, I also addressed.

If you want to accuse me of supporting the murder of innocent people you have very skewered morals.

Well, now hows that mister,

What happened there was they sold her on to him. They saw a chance to make some money and used it.

? I charged you of skewered morals because you openly defended the bartering of a human life for money (and later, maiming and death).

Re-read what you said. Who are you trying to excuse?

What are you talking about?

Re-read what I quoted off you, and turn your sarcasm meters on please.

UN sanctions against Iraq, resulting in many hundreds of thousands being killed is another.

So why was'nt Paris attacked, eh? If there was somehow UN involvement, how come is it were the ones who catch the brunt?

Were to easy to justify for attacks. Al-Qaeda would'nt attack Paris, London, or Berlin, because they might Jeopardize they're operations by attracting local authorities. They have just as many quams with France, Germany, and Britain as they do with the United States -- however, because there is many of them from within the European Theatre of Operations, they cant risk an attack and form more enemies.

I think placing dictators and regimes in power is another one.

One that appeared no more then a year ago ... but yea, your right, it is one of them. (Albeit slightly more recent and hardly the foundation of the concrete "OMFG ISRAEL").

The Gulf war, the whole, taking two sides annoyed them too.

No, noone in the UN took two sides. Once we saw the after-effects of the Iran and Iraq war, the last thing we wanted, is the "Rape of Kuwait".

It still happened, but less of what we thought it could be. Just 10,000 cars were jacked on the retreat to Basra.

Firstly, this has little to do with the torture videos. Many people who were tortured were believed to be innocents, and besides, because the enemy is barbaric we have to be too? Shall we air some decaptitations of Guantanimo bay prisoners? We're supposed to be spreading freedom, not getting away with murder because the enemy use horrific tactics.

No, it does -- and they're not torture videos, THEY'RE BEHEADING VIDEOS!

As for the rest of your post, please make each of the statements more clear.

They are using the beheading vids to get us out of the country. We invaded, they are trying to scare us off. They don't want us there because we've f**ked them over several times.

Which is bull. They screwed themselves over long enough, with the attacks into Tel-Aviv (1983-1991), the invasion of Kuwait (1990-1991), the Iran Iraq war (1980), the construction of Fedayeen Terror Camps (1973-1995), the purchasing of more then 30 million small-arms from Russian Black Markets (1951-1968), the purchasing of more then 20,000 Russian Tanks, Support Vehicles, Anti-Aircraft guns, and Fighter Jets (1963-1988), spilling 300,000 Iraqi Soldiers three times into the borders of Syria, Jordan and Lebanon for a possible invasion of Israel (1954)(1967)(1976), helping Egyptian Secret Service train and use Republican Guardsmen for Palestinian Street Wars (1965-1986), for murdering 500,000 ethnic Kurds, Shiites and Sunni people (1947-2001), which is expected to be more then a million now on behalf of UN Dig Sites (2002)

I could list more. I could post books. I could post magazine snippets. I could post movie clips. I could post movies via torrent or website. I could post pictures. I could post sounds. However, I unfortunately cannot lay the final blow to your accusations because of Forum Restrictions.

Yes, they do not like the west's attitude and actions towards them. It results in deaths, many deaths, and they want revenge.

How much more complex do you need it to be?

Looking at your post about 9/11, I'd think out of poor taste, we should be able to get revenge aswell.

 

[HunterSeeker]

I fail to see how being shot is any different from being beheaded, also being tortured is IMO worse then being beheaded.

 

[Raziaar]

I fail to see how being shot is any different from being beheaded, also being tortured is IMO worse then being beheaded.

Well, I guess it all depends. Are you tortured and then survive, or tortured and then killed?

Beheaded in itself is agonizing torture i'm sure before you finally pass out and die.

 

[Tr0n]

Well, I guess it all depends. Are you tortured and then survive, or tortured and then killed?

Beheaded in itself is agonizing torture i'm sure before you finally pass out and die.

I haven't seen the vids of the beheadings yet, but just picturing them in my mind is horrible enough.

 

[kirovman]

Wait a second. Aren't you one of those guys who bashes Christianity, but defends Islam now? Now that's just crazy. Or am I wrong about seeing you in the other threads saying the christian god does not exist, no matter what?

I'm not one to bash either. If people want to worship a god, let them do so, and I have respect for them, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights and lives of other people who live. Killing in the name of god isn't right.

Damn you caught me

I can't find the post I made (I know which one you're talking about), to reference it but I think I just posted a link to biblical contradictions, out of interest.

I didn't flatly deny the existance of god, jesus or say it was wrong. I just made a link to a site which objectively looks at some of the points in the bible.

Well at least that's what I recollect. If you find my post and quote it here, I'll be happy to explain everything I meant.

Or am I wrong about seeing you in the other threads saying the christian god does not exist, no matter what?

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that or even imply it, unless for some reason I was hiddeously drunk.

I do respect religions and their beliefs, but I do like to ocassionally ask a lot of questions, try to play "Devil's Advocate" against them (no I'm not a satanist hah), and sometimes wind them up a bit if they appear to be "holier than thou".

And you're correct. Killing in the name of a God is certainly not right.

As for unibiased media, I like BBC, they take a very neutral stance, and tone when reporting everything.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

“You have asked us to ‘Bring it on’, and so have we. Like never expected. Have you another challenge?”

Ahh, Kirsten Dunst and Eliza Dushku in a comedy about cheerleaders, nothing could be more overwhelming.

As for unibiased media, I like BBC, they take a very neutral stance, and tone when reporting everything.

But when having interviews, they tend to be DIRECT, which appals me a bit as they are representative to our country

 

[burner69]

Oh, so Iraq was involved with the WTC incident then? I thought we all agreed the invasion of Iraq was unjustified ... perhaps I was wrong.

Stop putting words in my mouth. Osama Bin Laden said that part of the reason for 9/11 was the UN's sanctions against Iraq that resulted in half a million deaths - that does not mean it has anything to do with the Iraqi people. Get your facts straight, and stop trying to twist mine.

Well, did you read what I quoted off of you, and my later responses? I think that if you had, you would've understood I was pointing out the recruitment measures of terrorist organizations going so far as to encourage children into war.

I mean, it was'nt that hard to get to.

But not anything to do with Iraq? So pretty much pointless to bring into the debate that me and Kore were having about Iraqi terrorists.

First, I'm not your buddy.

Ha, no, you're not. You sound like a prick when you say that.

Second, you were defending the morality of the terror groups who sold Hassan to the Al-Zarqwai linked groups. From which, I also addressed.

Where was I defending the morals? I said: They sold her to make money. That was a fact. If I'd said: They sold her to make money, so it's okay. That would have been defending.
If you can't recieve any information about what the terrorists are up to without crying that we're being sympathetic you need to grow up.

Well, now hows that mister, ? I charged you of skewered morals because you openly defended the bartering of a human life for money (and later, maiming and death).

Quote me saying anything about that. Not repeating facts about what happened, but saying that it was okay. You're confused.

Re-read what you said. Who are you trying to excuse?

Nothing. What am I condoning? Nothing. Learn to read.

Re-read what I quoted off you, and turn your sarcasm meters on please.

Do I have to do this a lot?

So why was'nt Paris attacked, eh? If there was somehow UN involvement, how come is it were the ones who catch the brunt?

Several reasons:
1) US forces were used to carry out the attack.
2) All but one of the nineteen sanctions that prohibited water cleaning chemicals in were held by the US.
3) OBL hates the west. US is the symbol of the west, so to speak.
I'm sure there's more.

Were to easy to justify for attacks. Al-Qaeda would'nt attack Paris, London, or Berlin, because they might Jeopardize they're operations by attracting local authorities. They have just as many quams with France, Germany, and Britain as they do with the United States -- however, because there is many of them from within the European Theatre of Operations, they cant risk an attack and form more enemies.

That could be another reason.

One that appeared no more then a year ago ... but yea, your right, it is one of them. (Albeit slightly more recent and hardly the foundation of the concrete "OMFG ISRAEL").

There've been plenty more.

No, noone in the UN took two sides. Once we saw the after-effects of the Iran and Iraq war, the last thing we wanted, is the "Rape of Kuwait".

We gave weapons and support to both sides, then attacked the invading Iraqi army. People can get grumpy about that kinda stuff.

It still happened, but less of what we thought it could be. Just 10,000 cars were jacked on the retreat to Basra.

OK.

No, it does -- and they're not torture videos, THEY'RE BEHEADING VIDEOS!

That you seem to have a morbid fascination with. I was referring to the torture videos of Iraqi prisoners by Brittish and US troops.

As for the rest of your post, please make each of the statements more clear.

Why can't you understand them? How simplistic do you want the statements? Am I allowed to state facts about terrorists or is that defending them?

Which is bull. They screwed themselves over long enough, with the attacks into Tel-Aviv (1983-1991), the invasion of Kuwait (1990-1991), the Iran Iraq war (1980), the construction of Fedayeen Terror Camps (1973-1995), the purchasing of more then 30 million small-arms from Russian Black Markets (1951-1968), the purchasing of more then 20,000 Russian Tanks, Support Vehicles, Anti-Aircraft guns, and Fighter Jets (1963-1988), spilling 300,000 Iraqi Soldiers three times into the borders of Syria, Jordan and Lebanon for a possible invasion of Israel (1954)(1967)(1976), helping Egyptian Secret Service train and use Republican Guardsmen for Palestinian Street Wars (1965-1986), for murdering 500,000 ethnic Kurds, Shiites and Sunni people (1947-2001), which is expected to be more then a million now on behalf of UN Dig Sites (2002)

And that means that we haven't screwed them over? Please explain how that works.

I could list more. I could post books. I could post magazine snippets. I could post movie clips. I could post movies via torrent or website. I could post pictures. I could post sounds. However, I unfortunately cannot lay the final blow to your accusations because of Forum Restrictions.

Final blow? The final blow being: The people we're fighting have been in conflict before, so that means that we've never f**ked them over. Please, sort your logic out.

Looking at your post about 9/11, I'd think out of poor taste, we should be able to get revenge aswell.

It's debateable. Certainly an attack was needed, but I think you got your revenge in Afghanistan. You don't need to get involved with a country that had bugger all to do with it.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Stop putting words in my mouth. Osama Bin Laden said that part of the reason for 9/11 was the UN's sanctions against Iraq that resulted in half a million deaths - that does not mean it has anything to do with the Iraqi people. Get your facts straight, and stop trying to twist mine.

Lets just get back to the point here:

You've stated in this thread, others before, the Iraqis were involved with 9.11 -- I'd like to know why you believe they were; and further, (just to make you happy) why you believe Osama Bin Laden who failed to cooperatively work with Saddam Huessein according to you, bothered to mention Iraq?

Also, I'd like to add your country was also apart of the sanctioning commited by the UN. If you truely believe an outside force was more responsible for Huesseins selfishness and attrocious character, I'd like to point out that 500,000 killed by Saddams Genocidal behavior, is a testament that he's his own man with his own country.

Finally, a last question but on this same point, should'nt have Saddam Huessein cooperated with the UN to begin with instead of purchasing weapons that could well reach Moscow within 30 minutes to an hour from launch-off? What was more worth it? Striking Tel-Aviv, or killing your own people by not obeying sanctions?

But not anything to do with Iraq?

Before tangently bickering off from the question before I can answer it ... ahem!

Lots to do with Iraq. Oh, and lots to do with that terrorist debate you were having with Kore. I've stated before, these TV shows have aired in Palestine, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iran (which has its own Hezobellah or however you spell it, network), Iraq, and Saudi-Arabia.

Further, such programming was recorded from 2001-2002, and was then broadcast by tape accross TV's throughout Pakistan and Afghanistan. I think this has a lot to do with terrorist recruitment; and it also has a lot to do with the flashpoint nature of some middle-eastern countries.

These programs were could be heard via Radio-Station reenactments over Steroes and Receivers, they were airing by TV in 1980. Once the station gained enough popularity, demands of it caused the channel to become available to Cable or Satellite users around the Middle-East. PATV is the fourth most watched television program in the middle-east, Al-Jazeera ranking as the first most watched.

Oh, and the topic was'nt Al-Jazeera; just some PATV facts so you know.

Ha, no, you're not. You sound like a prick when you say that.

If the conduct of your words is the conduct of debating gentlemen -- then I'll take that as a compliment.

Where was I defending the morals? I said: They sold her to make money. That was a fact. If I'd said: They sold her to make money, so it's okay. That would have been defending.

No, this is how you stated it:

What happened there was they sold her on to him. They saw a chance to make some money and used it.

Oh, the context of your message reads very clear burner.

You were trying to afford yourself a defense against my presentation; that they're is no distinguishable conduct between the terrorists in Iraq now, and your alleged "Freedom Fighters."

Recollecting from your own quote, anyone of us here can read that you were trying to do: Handing off the guilt of Margaret Hassans maiming and killing, to some other more easily justifiable group that you felt I was perhaps more familiar with. I'd like to add that wether or not your "Freedom Fighters" do exist, that their conduct of selling human lives for death and pavement, makes them guilty by association.

... and lets not forget your "freedom fighters" who you've not presented a name for, also threatened her life with a beheading long before Zarqwai made this alleged deal ... its really hypocritical.

The conduct is the same burner, inexcusable -- they're both guilty for her psychological trauma, her transportation further away from the hope of life, business in trading her life for money, and then later, killing her.

Quote me saying anything about that. Not repeating facts about what happened, but saying that it was okay. You're confused.

Look above, burner. You'll find that I've answered your questions -- and before you present more of your own to me, lets just clarify in future debates not to run each other over by answering our own questions.

There've been plenty more.

How can you make that statement, when you stated:

I'm sure there's more.

You either know theres more, or you believe there's more. You've only gaven me three or four points whose dedication is'int as concrete or extended with comparison to the largest one; the US supports Isreal OMFG.

It might be for another thread, but lets find somethings that actually have ground instead of being hazy to try and cover many more broad topics, when infact, only four points have been mentioned but not described in detail.

We gave weapons and support to both sides, then attacked the invading Iraqi army. People can get grumpy about that kinda stuff.

No, we did'nt give them weapons. The Russians gave them they're weapons. Photographic, Audio, and Video proof show that 99.9 percent of all Iraqi Insurgents are either equiped with PK series weapons ( a run-line to the AK47), AK series weapons, or express made Saudi and Israeli variant weapons.

During the Iran-Iraq war, military advisors came down from Russia to overview the scope of their weapons capabilities. From within one of Saddams own palaces, they watched the news of the war and advised for plans from within it.

After Saddam was driven back out, the advisors returned on the start of the Iraq-Kuwait, Iraq-Coalition war of 1990-1991. They left soon after the Basra highway full of 20,000 troops, was bombed into oblivion.

What they're arrival and witness suggests, is that they were there to see how they're weapons stacked up against Western Technology. The Iraqi weapons were effective against dated Soviet trucks and Tanks -- but they proved ineffective against the Challenger and Abrams.

That, and the combined arms our countries were capable of.

torture videos of Iraqi prisoners by Brittish and US troops.

So, where did you find them?

Why can't you understand them? How simplistic do you want the statements? Am I allowed to state facts about terrorists or is that defending them?

What facts do you know besides four other reasons for why they might hate us? Alls your doing is repeating yourself, and then, suggesting they're could be more to picture without really providing that order of information.

Its not my responsibility to be posting this information, after all, you've now openly questioned if your allowed to post "facts" about terrorists. Why not just post them instead of ask?

And that means that we haven't screwed them over? Please explain how that works.

Well, it works because we were'nt Iraq, invading Iran, Kuwait, or launching Scud Missles into Tel-Aviv. It works even better because we were'nt trying to advance the goal of cleaning Israel off of the world map through Global Jihad. It works a heck of lot better, when see images of Elite Republican Guardsmen saluting towards Saddam from atop Russian made T-55's ... and not Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

Where you get we screwed them over, when the country itself chose to invade not one, not two, but three different countries; and attack a total of six nations in under a period of thirty years, is not just a little beyond me ... its like, back there. With Bugs Bunny at Alberqeque.

Final blow? The final blow being: The people we're fighting have been in conflict before, so that means that we've never f**ked them over.

Thanks, but if wrighting to yourself somehow makes you feel that your arguements are gratified and mine are petty, acknowledge that I've been warned before for attempting to complete my arguements with graphic videos, audios, and photographs; and I have no intention of gaining another warning due to explicit content.